Reviews/Comptes rendus
Biotechnology & Food for Canadians
by Alan McHughen. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute, 2002. Pp. 69.
and
Governing Food: Science, Safety and Trade
edited by Peter W.B. Phillips and Robert Wolfe.
Montreal and Kingston: School of Policy Studies,
Queen’s University and McGill-Queen’s University
Press, 2001. Pp. 178. $26.95.
Lately consumers and policymakers have heard little
about breakthroughs in genetic engineered foods,
and more about potential health and environmental
disasters. This is despite early promise for improved
human health and biotechnological developments in
agriculture from better crops produced with fewer
pesticides, less fuel, less tilling and reduced pollution. Alan McHughen presents arguments that are
strongly underplayed in the media and provides
much needed balance to the discussion of genetic
engineering (GE) safety.
McHughen explains that much of the misunderstanding of the science behind GE-food is the blurring of what the process entails. The concerns over
GE food boil down to the presence or absence of a
specific protein, which is encoded by the introduced
gene. Such proteins have been the objects of intense
scrutiny before their use in GE. For example, it is
rather tiresome to hear time and again about allergy
risk. The one cited case involved the transfer of a
Brazil nut protein, where the alien protein was per
se the allergenic risk, and for which the ill-effects
were identified long before there was any chance of
it hitting the marketplace. Although allergies are
notoriously difficult to predict, GE allergy risk is
no higher than that derived from more classical ways
of creating novel food products. Equally wearisome
is the presentation of non-target insecticide victims
like the predicted monarch butterfly slaughter from
Bt-transformed corn. Unless force-fed in a laboratory,
monarchs do not normally encounter corn pollen.
On the other side of the coin, McHughen goes
on at length with some equally tiresome parables.
267
This includes how GE organisms are merely an extension of “traditional biotechnology,” or the human
selection of desirable traits (and once again we are
taken through the domestication of corn). Clearly,
however, in allowing a crossing of species barriers,
transgene technology is a form of genetic modification that uses technology quite different from the
past. While he goes far in de-mystifying some irritatingly persistent myths of GE danger, McHughen’s
presentation omits critical discussion. He strives to
present GE foods and their safety as known entities, but by focusing on the semantics of how “natural” the GE products are, McHughen’s work takes
the focus away from the more important issue —
which is whether GE results in safe food.
Much of the focus for anti-GE sentiment gets
heaped on the multinational “boogey-monsters” like
Monsanto. Yet, those corporations, as McHughen
points out without explicitly saying so, follow the
pharmacalogical model of approval: the corporation
applies for permission and does the testing; government watch-dog agencies scrutinize for product approval. It is interesting to note that we still ingest
pills in the name of medicine, trusting that the multinational pharmaceutical companies do adequate
research and the government has sufficiently protected our interests. Suddenly, when it becomes a
food, the process is perceived as unacceptable.
Furthermore, the lines between food and medicine
are blurring more and more. Many so-called functional foods, health foods, and nutraceuticals have
entered our diet with little or no regulation or testing. And what about other traditional foods, should
we not apply the same caution? Roasted coffee has
over 1,000 chemicals; only 27 have been rigorously
tested and 19 of those were designated rodent carcinogens (Ames and Gold 1997).
McHughen effectively scuttles many of the antiGE concerns. The major remaining trepidation pertains to a phenomenon that the anti-GE groups are
not very effective at articulating. The new impacting paradigm in molecular biology is proteomics —
the study of proteins and protein interactions.
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
268 Reviews/Comptes rendus
Genomics (the organization and activity of the
complete suite of genes) has gone a long way toward explaining how organisms live, grow, and
adapt. However, after the protein is formed by the
gene, much can happen in terms of how, where, and
when that protein ever carries out its activity. Once
made, it can be altered in structure or routinely regulated by the presence of other proteins. What happens if a protein is introduced into another organism
and is, hence, found out of biochemical context? One
cannot say for sure. Likely McHughen’s simplified
new gene makes new protein with desired activity
presentation is often applicable; but that is not to
say that there remains much room for modification
of that protein or interference in the usual activity
of the resident cell’s enzymes. Indeed a high frequency of transgene “silencing” is likely due to the
inability of an introduced protein to be made, or to
function, out of context. This is usually expressed
by the anti-GE groups by implying a gene is “where
it shouldn’t be” and is “somehow” making Frankenchanges to the host organism. Will it create a new
allergen? This is highly unlikely, but these are the
sorts of implications made to place doubt in the minds
of consumers. Even if they do, what are the chances it
will slip by the testing that is currently in place?
anti-GE sentiments that have emerged. To understand this, one must travel out of one’s sphere of
expertise. To deal with the resultant confusion, Peter Phillips’ and Robert Wolfe’s monograph, Governing Food, can be valuable for the policymaker.
Phillips and Wolfe point out the interplay of the science experts, consumers/citizens, business people
and policymakers. Science reassures us by emphasizing firm answers to “known” questions (those for
which we currently have the imagination and knowledge to ask). The anti-GE groups play up the potential “unknowns” and place doubt as to whether the
scientists are even asking the right questions
(covering all angles of risk). By having such doubt
placed into the process, government policymakers
are pushed toward the “precautionary principle” and
pressed to shut the technology down. In the end,
policymakers should be asking themselves whether
they should buy into this doubt. The mandate of antiGE groups is to place reasonable doubt in the minds
of consumers. However, as pointed out by Phillips and
Wolfe, not a single food exists that is 100 percent riskfree. The relevant challenge for policymakers is to assess what level of risk, or uncertainty, is reasonable
for the acceptance or rejection of GE technology.
REFERENCE
As a scientist I read McHughen, in most places,
in agreement. What we know about GE food, I would
concur, shows there are great advantages for their
use, and, despite rigorous scrutiny, there is no convincing case that GE foods are damaging to our
health. Many a scientist is perplexed by the strong
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
Ames, B.N. and L.S. Gold. 1997. “Pollution, Pesticides
and Cancer Misconceptions,” in What Risk? ed.
R. Bate. Boston: Butterrworth-Heinemann, pp. 173-90.
NEIL EMERY, Biology Department, Trent University
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Making Money: An Insider’s Perspective on
Finance, Politics, and Canada’s Central Bank
by John Crow. Etobicoke: John Wiley & Sons, 2002.
Pp. xv, 256. $36.95.
This is an intriguing, readable memoir well worth
careful attention. When I picked it up I expected a
defence of monetary policy during John Crow’s tenure as governor of the Bank of Canada. It provides
that, of course, but also much more. Although the
analysis is often brief, leaving the reader pleading
for more, the book offers interesting insights into
the central bank’s internal operations and its involvement in a range of domestic and international policies.
The book is in three parts. The first deals with
domestic institutional issues starting with the constitutional position of the bank. How independent
can an institution be whose sole shareholder is the
minister of finance? Crow reviews the Coyne affair
and reminds us of the Rasminsky manifesto, later
partly legislated, that in principle the minister can
instruct the governor on policy but nonetheless the
threat of resignation in the face of a repugnant
instruction, with attendant political and financial
consequences, provides a significant degree of independence. The review of history is embellished by
consideration of the academic debate about the appropriate scope of independence: for the formulation of
policy or just its implementation? Not surprisingly,
Crow’s position is inclusive. However, he also toys with
a formal constitutional provision that would at once
liberate and restrain the central bank by requiring it to
pursue only price level stability. But perhaps Crow’s
most revealing constitutional observation comes later
in the book when he acknowledges that the agreements
between Finance and the bank on target ranges for inflation undermine the independence of the central bank.
In such agreements the Department of Finance inevitably has the upper hand.
The book also discusses other domestic institutional issues, including the nature and role of the
bank’s board. I find Crow’s assertion of the dangers
of provincial government involvement in policy per-
269
suasive, yet I also find his defence of politically appointed directors as representatives of the regions
unconvincing. One of the notable strengths of the
US Federal Reserve system is its unique federal
structure. While preserving the centralization of
policy decisions it has provided powerful regional
input into the policy process and regional centres
for research, the dissemination of analysis and occasionally open criticism of policy. The regional
Federal Reserve Banks are not under the direct control of either state or central authorities. Canada’s regional diversity is no less profound. Perhaps a Federal
Reserve type arrangement is not feasible here given
our particular political culture, but Crow’s discussion
of the board would have been much more useful had
he explored governance models for the bank that do
not depend on idiosyncratic choices by Ottawa.
The second part is concerned with international
institutional issues, particularly the Basel Agreement
which returned bank capital to the centre of bank
regulatory policy, and the exchange rate regime. The
discussion of the negotiation of the Basel Agreement
is fascinating. I only wish that Crow had expanded
it to explore the issues in greater depth. On the exchange rate regime, he is not enamoured with either
those who would weld the Canadian dollar to the
American dollar (using their currency is a non-starter)
or those who would use the exchange rate as the primary instrument (target?) for monetary policy. To avoid
unnecessary costs and gross policy errors the exchange
rate must be left free to clear the market.
When it comes to the analysis of monetary policy
in the third part, Crow is pragmatic — almost antiintellectual. He vigorously insists that monetary
policy must focus on inflation as its only objective.
It works! Interestingly, he offers no coherent theory
as to how it works and indeed laments the failures
of theoretical models used to guide monetary policy
in the past, particularly the credit conditions and
money supply theories. With strong justification,
Crow reveals himself to be a believer in the Lucas
principle that markets will adapt to policy, often
negating or redirecting its effects. The Crow solu-
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
270 Reviews/Comptes rendus
tion: at the first sign of “excessive” inflation, apply
monetary brakes. To do so, focus not on the money
supply or interest rates or the exchange rate but on
that amorphous amalgam called “monetary conditions.” Some readers will be distressed by his observation that “the costs of getting inflation down …
are transitional” (p. 213) as though they are unim-
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
portant (which he emphasizes they are not). While
transitional in the aggregate, for individuals and
families the effects can be permanent. Perhaps we
are to regard them, to use the American generals’
phrase, as simply “collateral damage.”
RONALD A. S HEARER, University of British Columbia
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Canadian Nuclear Energy Policy
edited by G. Bruce Doern, Arsian Dorman and
Robert W. Morrison. Toronto: University of Toronto
Press, 2001. Pp. 384. $50.00
Nuclear energy policy is both relevant and important
to Canada and to Canadians. The future development
and commercialization of the CANDU technology,
continued operation of CANDU reactors in New
Brunswick, Quebec, and especially Ontario and the
eventual disposal of nuclear waste within this country
are all issues of economic, political and environmental
importance. As such, the audience for a book describing institutions, policies, and market challenges of a
Canadian nuclear energy policy should be broad and
large. Policymakers, political scientists, economists,
and others should be interested in the issues and analysis.
Unfortunately, Canadian Nuclear Energy Policy
will only partially satisfy its readers. As is often the
case with a collection of conference papers, this
book lacks a clear focus and the chapters present an
uneven read. Although most chapters are in fact interesting, the flow is often lacking between them.
This is not necessarily a problem at a conference,
but makes for an unsatisfying text.
The stage is set in the first chapter by describing
the “precarious opportunity” available to Canada in
designing future policies and evolving institutions.
The extent of the opportunity, or challenge, is analyzed
through the presentation and discussion of five key
nuclear policy and institutional choices.
1. Who will pay for and carry out nuclear R&D
and waste management?
2. What models of regulation will govern nuclear
energy in the global innovation age?
3. What are Canada’s prospects for marketing
CANDU reactors and uranium abroad, what
long-term commitments do these efforts imply,
and what is the role of government in this area?
271
4. Will a renewed federal-Ontario nuclear partnership be reconstructed to replace the more distant relationships of the past decade, one that
makes sense in the context of the new quasicompetitive regime for Ontario electricity generation and AECL’s focus on CANDU exports?
5. Can new forms of trust and transparency be built
between the Canadian public and the array of
public and private institutions that govern nuclear energy in Canada and abroad, especially
in the context of climate change and sustainable
development?
These five questions are dealt with, to differing levels
of detail, in the chapters that follow. What is lacking,
however, in the introduction is a more thorough presentation of industry facts and background. Data, such
as that presented in Chapter 3 for the United Kingdom
(on the history of development, on costs, on subsidy
levels, etc.), would have been helpful here, or
someplace earlier in the text, especially for readers with
little prior knowledge of Canada’s nuclear industry.
Over and above these five questions, it seems to
me that three areas of interest regarding nuclear
policy development appear to be important today:
the impact of electricity market restructuring on
operation and construction of nuclear plants, the
search for acceptable long-term waste disposal solutions, and the impact of climate change strategies
on future nuclear development.
The first of these is particularly well covered and
a highlight of the text. The discussion on nuclear
power and deregulation in the United Kingdom is
one of the best chapters in this collection. It presents
in a clear and concise manner some of the history
of nuclear development and then situates some of
the key issues for nuclear power in the 1990s during the deregulation of the electricity industry. The
section on competitive markets and nuclear power
is particularly relevant to the current situation in
Ontario. The observation that British Energy is par-
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
272 Reviews/Comptes rendus
ticularly vulnerable to its inflexible cost structure
is, alas, all too obvious today to those who have followed BE’s problems in Ontario. Finally, although
the long-term issues of waste disposal and costs have
not been diminished by privatization, at least they
are now clear and transparent.
gone on regarding the US plans for the Yucca Mountain site, it was a little surprising to see no reference
to it in this chapter. Some description of the relative
size of the problem in Canada compared to the US,
such as relative volumes of waste and geographical
distribution, would also have been useful.
Likewise, the analysis of restructured electricity
markets in Chapter 8 is excellent. The basic message is that market-based decisions do in fact benefit
nuclear generation. This may be true, but as the last
two years have demonstrated in North America, electricity markets can be quite volatile. Changing conditions in fuel markets, changing environmental
policies, to name but two issues, have important
impacts on the relative economics of different generation technologies. Similarly, decisions on Bruce
and Darlington in Ontario will affect investments
in other resources. The chapter provides much useful information, but not enough to convince this
reader that nuclear power is necessarily going to
benefit restructured electricity markets.
Unfortunately, there is insufficient discussion of
the impact of climate-change strategies on future
nuclear development and what is presented is already dated. Again, this is not surprising given the
pace at which events have unfolded in the last year.
As well, much of the institutional analysis of AECL
and regulation is, from the point of view of an economist at least, not too revealing or interesting.
Nuclear waste disposal is probably the second
most important issue in the minds of the public, after safe operation of nuclear plants. Chapter 6 does
a good job of describing where authority lies in designing waste disposal policy in Canada. Like the
United States, Canada is considering deep geological sequestration of nuclear waste. Given the massive
amount of research, analysis, and debate that has
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
In summary then, this book does provide a fair
amount of interesting information and discussion of
many issues related to Canadian nuclear policy and
industry. Part of my dissatisfaction with the text is
that the chapters do not flow that well from one to
the other and are uneven in terms of contribution
and overall quality. However, this is not surprising
given that the authors come from different backgrounds and use different approaches to analyze the
issues. As an economist, I would have liked to see
more discussion of markets along with more data.
JOSEPH A. DOUCET, School of Business, University
of Alberta
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Restructuring and Resistance: Canadian Public
Policy in an Age of Global Capitalism
edited by Mike Burke, Colin Mooers and John
Shields. Halifax: Fernwood, 2000.
Examining the political meaning and social implications of neoliberal restructuring in Canada, surveying examples of such restructuring within major
policy fields, and theoretically placing it within the
broader context of globalizing capitalism, this collection is an important contribution to understanding Canadian public policy in the contemporary
context. The collection also presents an interesting
and informative overview of the state of debates on
the left regarding strategies of resistance to neoliberal restructuring. The collection compellingly
challenges some of the central propositions that have
dominated left discourse on neoliberal restructuring in Canada. Nevertheless, another one of the central tenets of left discourse — the assumption that
more open democratic politics will foster greater
resistance to neoliberal restructuring — remains
largely unexamined. Further consideration of this
issue would strengthen the discussion of strategies
of resistance to neoliberal restructuring.
The explicit political project underpinning the
collection is to consider “the forms and strategies
of social resistance that have emerged in response
to the neoliberal agenda” while engaging “both
theoretical and concrete arguments for developing
the capacity to resist” (p. 11). Part One, Globalization,
the State and Shifting Terrains, “examines theoretical approaches to policy change and the broader
social and structural contexts of neoliberal policymaking” (p. 13). Part Two, Neoliberal Restructuring
of Public Policy provides “six case studies of policy
sectors that have been affected by restructuring and
examines some of the concrete policy changes that
have occurred in each sector” (p. 16). Part Three,
Restructuring and Resistance: Theory and Practice,
considers “the challenges faced by the left in confronting the neoliberal agenda” (p. 20) although the
focus is largely on internal debates of the left.
273
The collection compellingly challenges arguments positing the limited power of the state under
globalizing capitalism. This is particularly important when the claim that “there is no alternative to
neo-liberal restructuring” has been “largely accepted
by both the right and much of the left in Canada”
(p. 23). The overall collection supports the view that
“the scope of governance is far greater than proponents of ‘strong’ versions of globalization allow”
(p. 15). A realistic appraisal of the strength of the
state is indispensable to discussions of the scope for
democratic resistance to neoliberal restructuring and
this is one of the central contributions of the collection.
Perhaps more notably, the linkage between nationalism and resistance to the neoliberal agenda
which has dominated left discourse in Canada for a
considerable period is also challenged. From a
gender-based perspective, Ferguson compellingly
outlines “just how dangerous the preoccupation with
national sovereignty can be from the standpoint of
women” (p. 21). McNally’s penetrating and incisive
analysis of globalization as a new form of capitalism powerfully develops a complementary critique
of left-nationalism in Canada.
Within the collection, various authors challenge
how progressive the Keynesian consensus was, how
far neoliberal restructuring has progressed, and, as
a result, the significance of the impacts of the shift.
Not surprisingly, those who view the defunct
Keynesian consensus in the most favourable light
tend to emphasize the “full-scale dismantling” of
the welfare state. For example, Russell’s overview
of the historical development of the Canadian welfare state argues that the “worst fears” of the critics
of FTA and NAFTA have been realized (p. 26). This
view is confronted by Ferguson’s admonition in her
excellent chapter on the relationship between left
feminism and the welfare state that the left must
avoid “nostalgia for a Golden Age that never was”
(p. 21). On the other side of this coin are debates
regarding the current state of affairs. For example,
Burke and Shields’ chapter on the Canadian labour
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
274 Reviews/Comptes rendus
market take pains to point out that the favourable
current employment situation obscures a disturbing
underlying reality of labour market polarization.
Similarly, Saloojee interprets employment equity
programs as a means to contain resistance to the
existing social hierarchy. These efforts to demonstrate how certain apparently progressive advances
are really part and parcel of regressive neoliberal
restructuring are confronted by alternative analyses.
For example, Lum and Williams’ chapter on employment equity convincingly describes a more complex
pattern of simultaneous retreat and advance in which
some developments are out of sync with a shrinking state and neoliberal restructuring. These issues
are central to debates about the potential of third
way politics as a strategy of resistance — a strategy
with which several contributions (Russell, McNally,
Mooers) directly take issue.
However, the overall collection rests rather heavily at times on a largely implicit and under-theorized
assumption that a further opening of the political
system to popular forces represents the antidote to
neoliberalism. Purporting to demonstrate “how fundamentally anti-democratic the neoliberal state has
become” (p. 17, italics mine), the collection does not
fully consider changes over time in the inclusiveness
of the Canadian political system. For example,
women and visible minorities were not more fully
included in the political process at the high-water
mark of the welfare state in the early to mid-1970s
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
than they have been over the past quarter century —
the period in which the Keynesian consensus
unraveled. Solidly linking neoliberal restructuring
with a decline in openness of the political process
seems relatively crucial to the argument that opening
the political process to greater popular participation
will help generate significant resistance to neoliberal
restructuring. The lack of success in resisting
neoliberal restructuring is largely attributed throughout the collection to the weaknesses of the left.
Again, the assumption is that there is widespread
latent popular resistance to neoliberal restructuring
that the left could seize upon if it could simply overcome internal challenges.
The collection fails to consider the possibility that
public indifference or even popular sentiment generally in line with neoliberal restructuring (for example, widespread demands for lower taxes) is one
of the fundamental challenges faced by the forces
of progressive resistance to neoliberalism. Deeper
empirical investigation of this question would contribute to the overall consideration of strategies of
resistance. The collection is a significant contribution
to debates regarding Canadian public policy in the
context of globalizing capitalism as well as an important overview of the current state of the left discourse
on strategies of resistance to neoliberal restructuring.
GERARD W. BOYCHUK, Political Science, University
of Waterloo
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Agenda-Setting Dynamics in Canada
by Stuart N. Soroka. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2002.
Pp. 168.
Every day in Canada, myriad groups and individuals
are working to have an impact on the political agenda.
Political parties, business groups, think tanks, community non-profits, unions, lobbyists, academics, the
media and governments themselves are among the actors. Given the high level of activity, it is curious that
so little attention has been paid to understanding what
works and what does not in agenda setting.
Agenda-Setting Dynamics in Canada ambitiously
sets out to model how political agendas are established in Canada. Soroka’s work is important for at
least three reasons. First, he considers the relationship between media, public, and policy agendas; as
he explains, previous studies typically looked at only
two of these three agendas. Second, Soroka’s analysis is focused on Canada; as he writes, “the vast
majority of previous empirical policy agenda-setting
work deals with the US, and examples do not always translate well into other political systems”
(p. 55). Third, Soroka examines a variety of policy
issues through his model — inflation and unemployment (“prominent issues”); AIDS, crime, and environment (“sensational issues”); and debt/deficit,
national unity, and taxes (“governmental issues”).
Soroka tests his model by examining how these
eight issues play out in Canadian politics, media, and
public opinion between 1985 and 1995. The model
itself is quite compelling. However, as Soroka acknowledges, testing the model faces practical limitations in that measures of each of the three agendas
are difficult to establish. For the policy agenda, the
most challenging of all to measure, Soroka examines
committee reports, legislative initiatives, Throne
Speech content, and Question Period discussion.
This cumbersome measurement of the policy agenda
is necessary due to the lack of openness in the Canadian political system. For the media agenda,
Soroka uses seven major newspapers but, of course,
the print focus ignores the impact of television, ra-
275
dio, and, increasingly, electronic news. For the public agenda, he uses public opinion “what is the most
important issue” responses. This public opinion measure, while useful, is unable to capture the impacts of
the many other elements of a public agenda.
Two things struck me while reading this book.
First, while the measurement constraints would be
considerable, it would be highly useful to see a much
more complete model tested. This is not a criticism
of Soroka’s work, but rather a potential next step in
agenda-setting research in Canada. For example, the
theoretical model Soroka outlines in his first chapter
includes “interest groups,” “influentials” and “issue
publics” as part of the public agenda, but these
groups are not considered in the analysis. It would
be interesting to study if think tanks (or interest
groups, community organizations or any other
agenda actors) tend to coalesce around similar issues, and the impact of their agenda-setting activities on the public, media, and policy agendas. (As
someone who works in a think tank, I am particularly interested in this question!) To provide another
example, elected officials often comment about the
role that direct public contact (e.g., phone calls, letters, petitions, issues raised at local town hall meetings) has in shaping their own priorities. What is in
fact the relationship between the direct contact aspect
of the public agenda and the policy agenda? Answering this question would provide a great deal of information about political responsiveness in Canada.
Second, as I read, a question continued to nag
me: What is the relationship between agendas and
outcomes? The entire point of political agendasetting is to influence public policy. Interest groups,
business leaders, think tanks, unions, and all the
other agenda actors devote the energy they do to
agenda-setting efforts on the presumption that the
end result is new and/or improved public policy.
While being on the policy agenda is important, it is
by itself insufficient for most involved.
Can agenda-setting models provide any understanding of which issues are carried forward into legisla-
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
276 Reviews/Comptes rendus
tion and which are not? Are issues that are important
on each of the public, media, and policy agendas more
likely to result in legislative change? Is one agenda
more relevant than the other two in promoting change?
Answers to questions like these would be of great value
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
to both the political science literature and to practitioners alike. Hopefully, Stuart Soroka’s work will
provide a basis for future studies along these lines.
LOLEEN BERDAHL, Canada West Foundation, Calgary
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003
Reviews/Comptes rendus
Environmental Politics in Canada: Managing
the Commons into the 21st Century
by Judith I. McKenzie. Don Mills: Oxford University Press, 2002. Pp. 325.
Environmental Politics in Canada is a compelling
and sobering investigation of the tenuous and intermittent appearance of issues associated with environmental degradation and the exploitation of
environmental assets on the Canadian policy agenda.
The work is compelling because it smoothly integrates a detailed study of the foundations underlying environmental thought and activism, with an
analysis of the impact that this environmental
thought and activism has had on Canadian environmental policies. The work is sobering on two levels. From the perspective of an environmental
economist, it is disheartening to find that in the
analysis of environmental policy economists’
insights on the common property and public good
attributes of environmental assets continue to be
swept away by the notion that the neoclassical economic paradigm unconditionally champions the
operation of an unfettered market. From the perspective of an environmentally conscious reader, it is
equally disheartening to find that the absence of
obvious and acute environmental degradation in
Canada has undermined public support, and hence,
the evolution and strengthening of policy over a wide
range of environmental issues.
McKenzie divides her investigation into six chapters. In its identification of the main streams of environmental thought and activism in Canada, the first
chapter distinguishes between the motives and goals
underlying “light green” and “dark green” environmentalism. Using the light green–dark green continuum as a tool for categorization, ecological,
Aboriginal, religious, and feminist views among
others, are discussed at a theoretical level of abstraction. Chapter 2 focuses on the possibility that a social movement may be embodied in Canada’s “green
organizations” and in Canadian’s fundamental environmental concerns. The discussion of the efforts
277
to quantify Canadian’s environmental consciousness
is a particularly powerful illustrative example. The
inherent constraints in the structure of the policymaking environment in Canada’s federal system are
discussed in the third chapter. Here we find a transition in the tone of the work from the broad and
conceptual, to the practical manifestation of the
ideas laid out in Chapters 1 and 2.
The final three chapters deal much more concretely with specific environmental issues that have
inspired policy responses built on the foundations
laid out in the first three chapters. It is in the second
half of the book that the smooth integration of anecdote and example into the more general discussion of policy response highlights the real strength
and value of McKenzie’s work. Fishery, mineral,
agricultural, forestry, and water issues are dealt with
in considerable detail in Chapter 4. The discussion
of a wide range of specific examples — the Burnt
Church lobster fishery, GMO production on Canadian farms, land tenure among BC forests, to name
but a few — force the reader to associate the more
abstract material in the first three chapters to issues
that appear on the front pages of our newspapers
every day. Again, these are powerful tools that
McKenzie uses well. The fifth chapter emphasizes
the need for environmentalists to be proactive in
their search for public and policy support by linking environmental degradation to human health and
national security. The optimism implicit in this chapter is refreshing. The final chapter moves beyond a
strictly Canadian context in its discussion of the
relationship between multilateral environmental and
trade organizations and agreements, and the transboundary problems associated with environmental
degradation. It seems that a clear and articulate discussion of the contributions made by economists in
general, but more specifically environmental economists, in the investigation of the relationship between
trade and environmental degradation could have been
helpful and enlightening. Unfortunately, we find no
evidence that economists have had anything of value
to add to the debate. The absence of this discussion is,
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
VOL . XXIX, NO. 2 2003
278 Reviews/Comptes rendus
in all likelihood, a result of economists’ insistence on
the use of notation and jargon, rather than a failure in
McKenzie’s policy analysis.
In general, the integration of anecdote and example into the more abstract discussions was one
of the strongest features of Environmental Policy in
Canada, but the absence of complementary statistical analysis and substantive empirical evidence allows the reader to question and possibly dismiss
some of McKenzie’s arguments. The sparing use of
CANADIAN PUBLIC POLICY – ANALYSE DE POLITIQUES,
images, tables, and graphs may make this book heavy
work for some readers, particularly undergraduates
who work under pressing time constraints. However,
despite these quibbles, which probably reflect the
reviewer’s prejudices rather than weaknesses in the
book, McKenzie has produced an interesting and insightful text that should attract a wide readership.
IAN KEAY, School of Environmental Studies and Department of Economics, Queen’s University
VOL . XXIX , NO . 2 2003